Radeon Vega 8 Efficient vs FirePro V4900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking823not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.35no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameTurksRaven
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 November 2011 (13 years ago)23 April 2018 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores480512
Core clock speed800 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1100 MHz
Number of transistors716 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate19.2035.20
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPS1.126 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2432

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length163 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth64 GB/sno data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 November 2011 23 April 2018
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 35 Watt

Vega 8 Efficient has an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FirePro V4900 and Radeon Vega 8 Efficient. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FirePro V4900 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon Vega 8 Efficient is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro V4900
FirePro V4900
AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
Radeon Vega 8 Efficient

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 141 vote

Rate FirePro V4900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 58 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Efficient on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.